Skip to main content

About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11
to get ahead of things, the plaintiffs here are attorneys, civil rights activists and others who are in regular contact with people overseas particularly people who might well be the subject of electronic surveillance by the federal government and they are challenging the law that allows electronic surveillance, this wiretapping because they're concerned that their case will be picked up. they're claiming to have standing to challenge this law because even though the surveillance might be directed overseas to people they're talking to get their dedication will get picked up in the course of that surveillance and so therefore they have the right to challenge it in court. that is the standing issue we we are dealing with. just to get to the merits for a minute, and the aftermath of the exposÉ in the mid-70's about various abuses in the intelligence community and in short in short is set up a system by which the executive branch would have to go to the court surveillance court here in d.c. and get permission when they wanted to do wiretapping for national security purpose to give s
with civil rights of the '60s. >> host: john is from illinois now. john is an independent. hi there. >> caller: hi. mr. johnson, the only problem i have is about the tax issue. and the reason why it's like -- the reason why i say that is, our taxes in this country have never been set at actually to be fair. what they were set up for originally was that the rich were supposed to pay the majority of their taxes in federal taxes, and the working class and the poor were supposed to pay most of -- the majority of theirs in home owners taxes, city and state taxes. and that has been all -- it's got everything out of sorts. my problem with what everybody calls a fair tax is, when you're on a fixed income, and these states are going to have to have such a high tax rate because the federal government is going to have such a lower one, that when anybody that is on a fixed tax rate goes in and buys a refrigerator, they cost $400, the lowest one they can buy, they have about $100 tax on the refrigerator. that is the problem. and the only ones it's going to hurt is people that are retired, people
question front and center unlike in the civil rights and the feminists and many of the important movement of our time where there was fear of going in that direction, it would split people, they weren't ready for it, the police would be angry and all the rest of it. this is a movement that said, no, no, no, we're putting the question of the 1% right front and center. that opens a space that i have since filled, that this book is not doable without the space opened by occupy wall street for the interest. if i'm correct in understanding, this is now in its third printing, and it only appeared in may of this year. that -- the thanks go to the people like the occupy wall street people who are willing to break from the tradition not to be limited by the tweedledum, tweedledee either/or republican and democrat and are willing to now push in another direction. >> well, another question on the occupy movement is, was asked about, well, what's happened to it? it seems to have gone into some kind of reis access or stasis. recess or stasis. >> a great political leader of the left whose name i won't
when we will knock it as fast as we can. the weekly standard would agree with civil-rights the goal should be equality of opportunity, not the quality of result, so i think that if you are seeing -- and i don't know that the figures that you gave me are accurate it might reflect the fact that there's a republican primary going on or the fact that one party at that particular time is feeling the same standards the same journalistic standards more than another. you can infer that there are more criticisms of one side and another coming and i think this varies over time and the actual fact that if there is any bias on our part that is just a false logic. >> i don't know if some of those are complaints about republicans criticizing other republicans. it's certainly not 3-1 on our side >> other questions? >> i am keeping deborah hopping. >> addition with we've heard about people choosing to believe their side for their team because i count myself among them i don't think many voters believe being a lawyer is a disqualifying characteristic for a candidate. what is the benefit that you are
the decision about whether they would title a same-sex relationship a marriage, a civil union or domestic partnership. but the test for me is whether the legal rights and responsibilities that someone else has, they should be able to have those same legal responsibilities and rights that i have. >> moderator: i just want to pin you down though. do you believe in gay marriage in the same way that president obama felt the need to clarify his stand, recognizing the institution of marriage as being possible and, indeed, should even be legal between a man and a man and a woman and a woman? cain cain david, i'll go right to the end of my answer. i would let state legislatures because the rules and regulates about marriage have traditionally been state policy, i would let state legislators make the decision about whether they would accord that -- >> moderator: you're not prepared, you're not prepared -- kaine: let me finish. i would be fine if they did it and they labeled it marriage, civil union or domestic partnership. for me is test is, are people given the same legal rights and responsibilit
that right while taking position in a conflict in the country, speaking about syria, that is currently confronted with a civil war where of atrocities will always be committed by both sides. although of course i understand that those atrocities are greater than once are committed by -- and how do the respect that right in a situation of a civil war? >> it's not just accepting frederick it is essentially a position of the international world. helsinki accords to the u.n., but this isn't achievable in every country that we would like it to be right now. there are a lot of countries where you don't have those kinds of rights that we have good solid relations with china, like you mention, the largest in the world. so it is an aspiration and it is an aspiration that increasingly over time and over the last few years has become a reality. in sony parts of the world. so we keep pushing the aspiration forward, keep hoping that country after country when a group of people after another, will learn to live in peace, learn to build a representative form of government. i would like these represent
of principles that we agree with with pakistan on afghanistan. i think neither of us want to see the civil war. we should find that basis. the question people are struggling with right now with the right mechanism in the bilateral relationship, but the right mechanism to pull people together to find those things we have in common. anyone in the last month or six weeks there've been developments i'm not privy to but i sense i'm moving ahead. per your question is a good one. we don't have, to my knowledge, we have not achieved the kind of meeting of minds on afghanistan that were going to need for this process up to 2014 and beyond 2014 to address. so it is an open question i agree if there is a tough one, that is the. i'm an independent consultant and i have a couple of questions that pick up on other points that i believe you made. if i understood you correctly, you really suggesting that we start our relations when people share our values. i'm sympathetic to that idea. i wanted first to make a comment, which many of those people in some sense identified with our values or goals are at least s
, yemen is expressed their will in providing or in niending -- finding a solution or avoiding the civil war, and, therefore, yes, yemen voted yes for a peaceful state. civil state, mod enstate, that is based on rule of law and respect of the rights of which allow us to get into the second phase and to implement what's left of the political solution and get the yemen out of the bottleneck and to make it less safely, and we have law -- draft law of the transition that will assist in solving all the bloodshed and all the conflicts, and we still in need of the political and economic assistance that we'll help -- will help us a lot in implementing all the other segments of the gulf initiative, and this is why the yemen people are looking for. we got tired of conflicts of wars, and now and through the national dialogue that we are preparing for in order to get this dialogue as soon as possible so we will have a blueprint of a prosperous yemeni based on future freedom and equality and through good governess by reforming the administration and combat corruption and focus on development, and we
or the way it has to be done in the civil way, i think this has to be checked, but we cannot launch a war on the terms that we have now so it's not acceptable for anyone, but at the same time, the right that we are giving to some, we should also ask ourselves why there is a lack of consistency in our policies in the region, and this kind of demonization of iran is not helping the region to find solutions so this is one. the second is about what is happening in e just a -- egypt and in -- what was the point you were making was -- >> [inaudible] >> yes, what is happening, the attack against the american embassy, and this that, of course, it's going to be used by the media. it's going to be once again used by people saying, luxe, -- look, even now, what we said about the uprising, ends up with people against the west. inside, it was very much positive in the whole process over the months of the uprisings is new slogans against the west, new slogans against the united states or european country. it was mubarak and e regime, nothing against the west. it was powerful. it was internal talk and s
in it's approach, and we believe it's not the right way to do it. if you look at precedence using the civil aviation organization for consensus building on international aviation issues, is it much more effective way to do this. we have been clear both on p the record, off the record, and at every level with our e.u. counterparts that this is unacceptable, that we do not support it. if you look closely at the reaction around the world, you'll see that we have a lot of other nations in concert with the united states who also believe the unilateral imposition of that emissions trading scheme is inappropriate. finally, there appears to be some recognition on the european side of late that there are real consequences for doing this. we will continue to press for the appropriate avenues for the resolution of an issue like this. we are continuing to make it clear that we have serious concerns and do not believe it should be implemented, and i think the consequences of the european union moving ahead unilaterally are much butter under by the e.u. these days. >> thank you. >> mr. chairma
to the development to great civilization. to make powerful use of those hopeless to think about why it is geography with cultural aspects. >> due to the right sales to cross the atlantic voyages the development of technology italy made it more precious to open up a new geography on to the world conflict system. coulter and economics flow from geography the accumulated experience of specific people over hundreds of thousands of years that leads to traditions that could be identifiable. to have the deeply identifiable coulter is romania a specific coulter has been formed by the conflict from invaders of central europe are those that has fostered a vicious negotiating style character and i can go through every country or many countries to talk about that. >> talk about germany. calling germany as a big prison is caught between the north sea and the baltic to expand could only move east or west. that sounds like the kind of analysis that was popular one century ago but is out of fashion. when we think of germany today what is your analysis? >> writing a great history enter the the point* and was it had
Search Results 0 to 10 of about 11